By MARK SARDELLA
WAKEFIELD — Progress on two 40B comprehensive permit applications currently before the Zoning Board of Appeals has slowed to a crawl, with the delays blamed largely on communication issues.
Recent ZBA hearings on a 100-unit 40B proposed at 119 Nahant St. and a 26-unit 40B at 32 Nahant St. have stalled amid concerns over density, massing, traffic and safety issues on each of the projects.
Particularly regarding the 119 Nahant St. project, alleged lack of communication on the part the applicant has the board expressing frustration with the pace of the process.
At last week’s meeting, ZBA chairman Tom Lucey reported that the attorney for the project, Jason Panos, had requested that the hearing be continued to May 8, citing the fact that a new engineering firm had been brought on board as they continued to work on other aspects of the project.
Lucey also told the board that he had attended the April 5 Traffic Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting on the 119 Nahant St. project. He said that Town Engineer Bill Renault, Fire Chief Michael Sullivan and Police Chief Steven Skory expressed many concerns at the TAC meeting. Among them were vehicle trips, sight lines, parking and driveway width.
“The TAC still has a lot of work to do,” Lucey said, before they conclude their study of the project’s traffic impact.
ZBA member Greg McIntosh said that he also attended the TAC meeting and said that the concerns expressed centered around basic safety issues.
He noted that the last time the development team appeared at a ZBA meeting was on March 13. Project attorney Jason Panos requested continuances ahead of scheduled hearings on March 27 and April 11.
McIntosh again reminded the board that Panos had not responded to requests for biographical information on the developer as well as a project history.
Lucey said that he has been documenting all of the applicant’s failures to respond to questions from the board and would confront Panos with that record when he next appears before the board.
ZBA member David Hatfield cautioned the board about taking the discussion much further without the applicant’s representative present.
“They’re not here and we shouldn’t be deliberating in their absence,” he said.
Lucey said that he didn’t think the foregoing discussion constituted “deliberations,” but Hatfield’s point was well-taken.
The ZBA continued the hearing to its May 8 meeting. Lucey apologized to neighbors and residents in attendance, explaining that he only received the letter from Panos requesting the continuance earlier that afternoon.
—–
Compared to 119 Nahant St., the hearings on the proposed 32 Nahant Street 40B have been less contentious, although communication issues seem to have stalled progress there as well.
Lucey explained that the materials to be discussed at the meeting had not been received from the developer by the Friday deadline. Therefore, he said, he was not willing to discuss issues pertaining to architecture at last week’s meeting.
Lucey also noted that, while he appreciated that the developer had cut the unit count down from 32 to 26 and reduced the height of the building, “I don’t think we’re done with massing and density.”
Tarbell and McIntosh said that they had not had a chance to review the materials that had only been submitted one day prior to last week’s hearing.
Representing developer Scott Green, attorney Paul Haverty said that he still wanted to discuss the traffic study that he had provided to the board several weeks earlier. He noted that Traffic engineer Scott Thornton was on hand to present the traffic study.
But Lucey noted that the town’s Traffic Advisory Commitee had not yet completed its analysis of the 32 Nahant St. Project. He said that it has been the ZBA’s intention all along to have the TAC complete its work first and then have the TAC on hand when the ZBA discusses the project’s traffic impact.
Lucey said that it was important for the ZBA to have its own subject matter experts present when traffic is discussed.
Hatfield agreed that discussing traffic without the TAC present would be a “one-sided” discussion.
Lucey encouraged Haverty to communicate with him ahead of meetings so there would be no confusion over what would be discussed.
